Law: Constitution of Pakistan 1973

Section: 10-A

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984

Section: 1(b), 2(2),18–46, 59 & 61, 72–84, 85 & 86, 88–101, 111-113

Law: West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 7(3), 9(2) & 9(3), 11, 17(1), 20

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 10-A

Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 14, 1(3)

Summary The petitioner challenged the Family Court’s order whereby documents Exh. D-4 to D-7 were exhibited through the statement of Respondent No.3’s counsel, despite the petitioner’s objection. The documents included NADRA/Form-B, birth certificate, divorce certificate and a guardianship order. The High Court held that although Family Courts enjoy procedural flexibility under Section 17(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1964, such flexibility cannot override the principles of fair trial and natural justice. A counsel may file or present documents, but cannot prove disputed documents merely through his own statement, particularly when the documents are challenged and the opposing party is entitled to cross-examination. Accordingly, the impugned orders were set aside and the documents were de-exhibited, with liberty to Respondent No.3 to properly tender and prove them through herself or competent witnesses. The Court further held that the question of paternity is within the jurisdiction of a civil court and that a decree of jactitation of marriage does not, by itself, render a child illegitimate. Tagline “A Family Court may adopt a flexible procedure, but disputed documents cannot be proved through counsel’s bare statement; the right of fair hearing and cross-examination remains protected under Article 10-A of the Constitution.” ORDER; Tariq Saleem Sheikh, J. – Respondent No.3 claims that she is the Petitioner’s wife, having married him in Lahore on 22.04.2001. She also holds CNIC No. 35202-2756524-0, issued by the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA), showing the Petitioner as her husband, which she alleges was obtained after completing all legal formalities. Respondent No.3 further claims that a son, M.B. (name withheld for privacy), was born from the marriage on 12.06.2005, and his birth was registered with NADRA under Child Registration Certificate (CRC) No. 100814-10-000606454-01, denoting the Petitioner as his father. On 27.01.2015, Respondent No.3 and M.B. filed a civil suit against the Petitioner and others seeking a declaration that Respondent No.3 was the Petitioner’s lawful wife and…